[1]董滢,高飞,雷普,等.应用一次性包皮环切吻合器（商环）与经典式、袖套式包皮环切术的临床对比研究[J].中国微创外科杂志,2012,12(7):638-640.
　nDong Ying,Gao Fei,Lei Pu,et al.Comparison of Disposable Circumcision Stapler with Conventional, and Sleeve Circumcisio[J].Chinese Journal of Minimally Invasive Surgery,2012,12(7):638-640.
点击复制

应用一次性包皮环切吻合器（商环）与经典式、袖套式包皮环切术的临床对比研究()
分享到：

《中国微创外科杂志》[ISSN:1009-6604/CN:11-4526/R]

卷:
12
期数:
2012年7期
页码:
638-640
栏目:
出版日期:
2012-07-20

文章信息/Info

Title:
Comparison of Disposable Circumcision Stapler with Conventional, and Sleeve Circumcisio
作者:
董滢; 高飞; 雷普; 张进; 王贵荣; 卜小斌; 葛虹
陕西省榆林市第二医院泌尿外科，榆林719000
Author(s):
nDong Ying;  Gao Fei;  Lei Pu;  et al.
Department of Urology, Yulin Second Hospital, Yulin 719000, China
关键词:
包皮环切术; 商环; 经典手术; 袖套手术; 选择性
Keywords:
Circumcision; Shang Ring; Conventional surgery; Sleeve circumcision; Selective
分类号:
R699.8
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
目的比较商环式、经典式、袖套式3种包皮环切术的优缺点。方法2009年7月～2011年10月，按就诊时间结合患者意愿分为3组，行包皮背侧切开包皮环切术107例（经典组），袖套式包皮环切术116例（袖套组），应用一次性包皮环切吻合器（商环）行包皮环切术119例（商环组）。对比3组手术时间、疼痛评分、失血量、伤口愈合时间、手术并发症发生率、术后包皮外观满意率、治疗费用等。结果与经典组及袖套组相比，商环组手术时间短［(27.5±5.6)min vs. (36.0±4.4)min vs. (4.5±0.9)min, F=1889.000, P=0.000］，出血量少［(12.7±6.1)ml vs. (3.7±1.6)ml vs. (0.6±0.1)ml, F=354.031, P=0.000］，术后24 h疼痛评分低［(5.5±1.3)分vs. (5.2±1.2)分vs. (1.6±0.9)分, F=404.029, P=0000］，术后包皮外观满意率高［87.9%（94/107）vs. 92.2%（107/116）vs. 99.2%（118/119）, χ2=11.786, P=0.003］，但拆环（线）的疼痛评分高［(3.2±1.5)分vs. (3.0±1.8)分vs. (8.7±1.0)分, F=557.214, P=0.000］，伤口愈合时间长［(139±2.0)d vs. (12.1±2.6)d vs. (23.6±4.8)d, F=392.169, P=0.000］，治疗费用高［(310.4±15.3)元 vs. (332.2±13.8)元 vs. (882.0±8.2)元, F=75 540.000, P=0.000］，3组手术并发症发生率差异无显著性［13.1%（14/107）vs. 10.3%（12/116）vs. 7.6%（9/119）, χ2=1.872, P=0.392］。 结论3种包皮环切术各有优缺点，商环式操作方法简单，手术时间短，出血量少，包皮外观满意度高，但拆环时疼痛明显，伤口愈合时间长，费用较高。
Abstract:
ObjectiveTo compare the advantage and disadvantage of disposable circumcision stapler (Shang Ring), conventional circumcision, and sleeve circumcision. MethodsFrom July 2009 to October 2011, according to the wishes of patients, people who were receiving circumcision in our hospital were divided into three groups: conventional, sleeve, and Shang Ring groups (n=107, 116 and 119, respectively). The operation time, pain score, blood loss, wound healing time, rate of postoperative complications, postoperative satisfaction with penile appearance, and treatment cost were compared among the groups. ResultsShang Ring group showed significantly shorter operation time ［(27.5±5.6) min vs. (36.0±4.4) min and (4.5±0.9) min, F=1889.000, P=0000］, less blood loss ［(12.7±6.1) ml vs. (3.7±1.6) ml and (0.6±0.1) ml, F=354.031, P=0.000］, lower pain score in 24 hours (5.5±1.3 vs. 5.2±1.2 and 1.6±0.9, F=404.029, P=0.000), higher rate of postoperative satisfaction with penile appearance ［87.9% (94/107) vs. 92.2% (107/116) and 99.2% (118/119), χ2=11.786, P=0.003］, but higher pain score when removing the ring (3.2±1.5 vs. 3.0±1.8 and 8.7±1.0, F=557.214, P=0.000), longer wound healing time ［(139±2.0) d vs. (12.1±2.6) d and (23.6±4.8 )d, F=392.169, P=0.000］, and higher treatment cost ［(310.4±15.3) RMB vs. (332.2±13.8) RMB and (882.0±8.2) RMB, F=75 540.000, P=0.000］ than the conventional and sleeve groups. No significant difference existed in the rate of postoperative complications among the three groups ［13.1% (14/107) vs. 10.3% (12/116) and 7.6% (9/119), χ2=1.872, P=0.392］.ConclusionsAll the approaches have advantages and disadvantages. The Shang Ring circumcision is the simplest with short operation time, few blood loss, and satisfied postoperative appearance of the penile, however, the pain of removing the ring is significant, the wound healing time is long, and the cost is high.

参考文献/References:

[1]程跃，彭弋风，刘毅东，等.应用中国商环包皮环切手术标准化方案对328例成年男性包皮环切的临床报告.中华男科杂志，2009，15（5）：584-592.
[2]程跃，严泽军，苏新军，等.中国商环包皮环切术与传统包皮环切术的临床对比研究.中华泌尿外科杂志，2011,32(5)：333-335.

更新日期/Last Update: 2013-04-03